Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
Dumb fun idea with the justice system, make it pvp?
-
Donny_Vito✭✭✭✭✭
✭redgreensunset wrote: »No. There's already too many cases where pvp is forced on pve players with no opt out. And as pointed out above the possibilities for griefing are legio. If you want to pvp go to Cyrodiil or IC. Or be original at least just a tiny bit original and ask for a new pvp expansion rather than try to force pvp on players that don't want to pvp.
Of course pvpers are not exactly known for their creativity so perhaps I am asking for the impossible here.
How is the bold statement even true? You are never forced to do PvP. You don't have to do the PvP events if you don't want, and you don't need any PvP skill lines if you're strictly PvE'ing. They might help, but no one is forcing you to run that content.
You choose to.
1 -
Tandor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Donny_Vito wrote: »redgreensunset wrote: »No. There's already too many cases where pvp is forced on pve players with no opt out. And as pointed out above the possibilities for griefing are legio. If you want to pvp go to Cyrodiil or IC. Or be original at least just a tiny bit original and ask for a new pvp expansion rather than try to force pvp on players that don't want to pvp.
Of course pvpers are not exactly known for their creativity so perhaps I am asking for the impossible here.
How is the bold statement even true? You are never forced to do PvP. You don't have to do the PvP events if you don't want, and you don't need any PvP skill lines if you're strictly PvE'ing. They might help, but no one is forcing you to run that content.
You choose to.
No-one is forcing you to run the PvP skill lines, but you do have to open them up if you want the login rewards that follow the APs that grant them. You are also forced into PvP if you want the Master Angler achievement that relates to a PvE activity in predominantly PvE zones but which you can't complete without going to Cyrodiil. You also get switched into combat mode when you pass dueling AoEs.
I'm not saying that these things are overly troublesome, but they do support the view that PvP is sometimes forced on those who want nothing to do with it.Edited by Tandor on January 3, 2020 9:09PM4 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Donny_Vito wrote: »redgreensunset wrote: »No. There's already too many cases where pvp is forced on pve players with no opt out. And as pointed out above the possibilities for griefing are legio. If you want to pvp go to Cyrodiil or IC. Or be original at least just a tiny bit original and ask for a new pvp expansion rather than try to force pvp on players that don't want to pvp.
Of course pvpers are not exactly known for their creativity so perhaps I am asking for the impossible here.
How is the bold statement even true? You are never forced to do PvP. You don't have to do the PvP events if you don't want, and you don't need any PvP skill lines if you're strictly PvE'ing. They might help, but no one is forcing you to run that content.
You choose to.
Technically many players do have to do a little PvP to get specific skills. Any stam dps, tank, or healer worth their salt has done some PvP to unlock specific skills but it is such a short and minor ordeal it is hardly worth being upset about.
I suppose the log in rewards could take care of that as Tandor points out but that is also a slow effort.
Regardless, it is really a moot point as is this entire thread as Zos will not be bringing PvP to the existing PvE zones in any form. If people thought this would be a PvP game that is a personal problem.2 -
Jdray✭✭✭Wow okay what im gathering is that theres a vocal portion that really hate pvp! I love them both to be honest, even though I die allot. Also im aware pvp feels unbalanced which could be the root of all the hostility.
0 -
JKorr✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭TheShadowScout wrote: »It has all been said.
They had plans, found numerous issues during conceptual stage, scrapped those plans and made a big fat "NOPE" on the whole idea.
Half the playerbase who were eager to gank those hapless questers who follow TG and DB stories sighed in disappointment... and the other half cheered in the knowledge they won't get ganked unless they actually go into cyrodil or other PvPlaces.
And until and unless the poweers that be change their mind on this... its hardly worth discussing.
If youre a good thief and assassin you shouldnt even have a bounty. All it did was take away all the danger from being a criminal. Which is sad tbh, completely gutted the depth of the game. They could have at least implemented it in cyrodiil or ic.
Unfortunately in some storylines that are pve only, you will probably get a bounty, no matter what class you're playing. Doing pve stories in Morrowind I ended up with a LOT of bounties on my dk, sorcerer, templar, and even the nb who is supposed to be stealthy. Why should I have hyper pvp players trying to kill my character for doing pve stories? Sneaking around to free slaves isn't thieving or assassination, but trespassing and getting noticed does get a bounty.
There is also the problem of players exploiting the daylights out of a bounty system, and griefing other players. I'm satisfied the devs realized the issues and decided to not go with the full justice system.
I dont think the bounties should be for petty amounts, only for an exorbitant amount, then people would have enough time to pay their bounties at said guilds and be done with it. The canning of the justice system was pure laziness, nothing more, they could have adressed all the issues the players had by tweaking the system here and there, instead, they just said hek it. It would have added a HUGE amount of depth to the fighters guild, could have lead to interesting conflicts between guilds, added for interesting player choices, and we lost all that because of laziness.
So then you're going to force me to stop what I'm doing and pay off bounties, or stop playing that character to let the bounties go away in time, or have the overeager openworld pvp players hunting my character down? Why are you penalizing my character for doing pve content that was purchased because it was pve content and not pvp?
Given what I've seen happen since early access, there is NO way the devs could have come up with a fool-proof system to keep some of the pvp players from griefing and exploiting a bounty system. Whether it would be by one player racking up a huge bounty and letting a buddy collect it, then switching roles, or finding choke points where players with bounties would have to pass to pay them off before they got killed and camping there, some players would intentionally make it miserable for players who weren't interested in pvp to play the game.
How would it have added anything to the Fighter's Guild? Their current contract is from Meridia, to kill daedra. And I'm sure every pvp player is mature enough to not hold grudges or start vendettas and feuds between player guilds that would really effect everyone within zone chat and never involve innocent bystanders who would end up caught in the cross-fire. Getting guilds to basically hate other guilds and hunt them whenever possible would make for such a nice, civil, friendly, inclusive game, wouldn't it.
The last event where players could do quests in Cyrodiil? Some wonderful [/sarcasm] pvpers kept camping the turn in points, and killing pve players who had to enter a door/building to turn in the quests. Must have been tons of fun for the pvpers to keep killing pve players who weren't fighting back, using the loading screen lag. Not so much fun for the pve players, I can't imagine why there were complaints and people who simply didn't bother with the event at all. [/sarcasm]9 -
Ohtimbar✭✭✭✭✭
✭I can see why some people might like the idea on paper, but I’m happy it died. I’m not a fan of pvpve, especially in ESO where equipment and play styles vary so dramatically between the two. The thought of wearing heavy impen in PVE to defend against gankers with badges makes me want to wretch. I could probably write a novel about all of the reasons why I dislike this idea, but thankfully I don’t care that much.forever stuck in combat1 -
CMDR_Un1k0rn✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭CMDR_Un1k0rn wrote: »Sorry mate, way too late. Sure ZOS would be well within their right to make these kind of changes and bring back these ideas, but at this point in the game's life...
Well player's aren't obligated to like new mechanics and something tells me the return of this old idea would possibly kill the game for many, many people.
It's cliche, but frankly I think at this point the only reasonable rebuttal is go to Cyrodiil, Imperial City or Battlegrounds.
With that said, there's nothing wrong with a new PvP expansion to the style of Imperial City. In fact I think it's long overdue.
But most of the zones are now long-established as PvE. Once people "settle", expect fierce opposition to drastic changes. The same would happen if PvP activities were hindered in Cyrodiil, for example.
Your last point is a telling one. Compare this thread to those where PvEers call for a PvE instance of Cyrodiil, and you'll see all the "Cyrodiil is a PvP zone, if you don't want to PvP don't go there" comments, but as soon as a thread like this appears calling for PvP in PvE zones those commenters soon change their tune
!
I'm not sure what you're trying to imply here. But if it's that I somehow "hate PvP", no, I don't. But this game does kinda' have a freaking massive story as well... Which I'm still going through. I'll start doing PvP when I've finished the stories. Just the order I'd like to do things.
As for players arguing against introducing no-opt-out PvP in what are currently PvE zones with only Duels available? Well... Yeah. What did you expect? I'm yet to see a developer yeet in some semi-compulsory PvP into a previously PvE-zone and not get thrown shade by their community.
I purchased this game knowing exactly how PvP worked within it, and all I'm saying is I would hope those RoE with players remain the same.
Like I say, at this age of the game it would be impossible for ZOS to change RoE without serious uproar.In-game username: Un1korn | Happy member of the PCNA UESP guild (Resident Daggerfall Covenant enjoyer) | Main & basically only character: Crucian Vulpin, Imperial Dragonknight of the Daggerfall Covenant, and Undaunted Bulwark (I tank) | Mountain bike enjoyer and vulpine appreciator | If you know me from PCEU: No | To ZOS: THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME BRING MY HORSE INTO BATTLE!0 -
heaven13✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Donny_Vito wrote: »redgreensunset wrote: »No. There's already too many cases where pvp is forced on pve players with no opt out. And as pointed out above the possibilities for griefing are legio. If you want to pvp go to Cyrodiil or IC. Or be original at least just a tiny bit original and ask for a new pvp expansion rather than try to force pvp on players that don't want to pvp.
Of course pvpers are not exactly known for their creativity so perhaps I am asking for the impossible here.
How is the bold statement even true? You are never forced to do PvP. You don't have to do the PvP events if you don't want, and you don't need any PvP skill lines if you're strictly PvE'ing. They might help, but no one is forcing you to run that content.
You choose to.
No-one is forcing you to run the PvP skill lines, but you do have to open them up if you want the login rewards that follow the APs that grant them. You are also forced into PvP if you want the Master Angler achievement that relates to a PvE activity in predominantly PvE zones but which you can't complete without going to Cyrodiil. You also get switched into combat mode when you pass dueling AoEs.
I'm not saying that these things are overly troublesome, but they do support the view that PvP is sometimes forced on those who want nothing to do with it.
No one is forced to PvP for the sake of PvP. If they feel the compulsion to participate due to rewards, events, etc...that's an incentive, but still not mandatory.
You're forced into a PvP zone for Master Angler, not to participate in PvP itself. It's rare that someone kills me at the fishing holes, even the ocean ones down by the Gate of Mnem and even rarer (rare enough that I have never personally had it happen, even in faction-locked campaign) for a person to wait for you to come back so they can kill you again.
You also do not need to to unlock the Alliance War skill tab to accept AP daily login rewards. You can even accept a daily AP reward on a character that hasn't hit level 10 yet which is before they would otherwise unlock those skills. It is slow to get your Alliance skills to level 6 (for Barrier, if you want it) without participating in PvP but it is absolutely possible.
Also..."switched into combat mode when you pass dueling AoEs"? Really? If you are close enough to someone who casts Radiating Regen or a dk who casts Obsidian Shield, or any other skill that affects 'allies', you will unsheathe your weapon regardless of whether the caster has initiated combat with anyone, other player or NPC. It has nothing to do with PvP. At all.
I still wouldn't want PvP in PvE zones, especially not the way most people ask for it, but I'll contest the argument that PvP is forced. You might not like it and might feel like you should do it, but it's absolutely not mandatory.
Edited by heaven13 on January 4, 2020 12:06AMPC/NAMountain God | Leave No Bone Unbroken | Apex Predator | Pure Lunacy | Depths Defier | No Rest for the Wicked | In Defiance of DeathMeet my characters :
Defanged the Devourer | Nature's Wrath | Relentless Raider | True Genius | Bane of Thorns | Subterranean Smasher | Ardent Bibliophile
vAA HM | vHRC HM | vSO HM | vDSA | vMoL HM | vHoF HM | vAS+2 | vCR+2 | vBRP | vSS HM | vKA | vRGIT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL THE SAME NOW, THANKS ZOS1 -
Sylvermynx✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Heh. I've run four characters through Cyrodiil for the fishing. On one of them, I actually saw a player of another faction - who very kindly ignored me.... but I would have been okay with her killing me, I just would have stood there and let her.
I pvp'd for MONTHS in a friend's guild on a WoW pvp server and hated every minute of it. It wasn't fun (especially as satband was - and is - my only available connect other than dialup....); I did get better at it, but it still wasn't fun.
I'm NOT doing it in this game. Thankfully, I have the choice, and I've chosen. Going into Cyro on "dead" campaigns is as close as I ever want to or will in future get.3 -
Dahveed✭✭✭✭✭
✭I hate watching other players crap disrespectfully over other players' ideas in the forum. You can tell them their idea won't happen and why, but you don't have to be a d!$k about it.
A lot of players (myself included) wanted this, and we know it won't happen. Just let us dream without yelling at us.1 -
Strider__Roshin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.1 -
Strider__Roshin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭I would make pickpocketing way more profitable though. I don't think it's a very popular means of making money.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I hate watching other players crap disrespectfully over other players' ideas in the forum. You can tell them their idea won't happen and why, but you don't have to be a d!$k about it.
A lot of players (myself included) wanted this, and we know it won't happen. Just let us dream without yelling at us.
As far as the original post this has been just a normal discussion. As far as those who have contributed false statements that this game was PvP focused, not PvE focused early on, falsehoods that the original dev team made this a PvP focused game, and the petty comment that PvE carebears are the reason this will not happen (clearly coming from someone who cannot handle going against actual PvP players). are all a different story but it is they that worked to change the tone of this thread.3 -
Strider__Roshin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭I hate watching other players crap disrespectfully over other players' ideas in the forum. You can tell them their idea won't happen and why, but you don't have to be a d!$k about it.
A lot of players (myself included) wanted this, and we know it won't happen. Just let us dream without yelling at us.
As far as the original post this has been just a normal discussion. As far as those who have contributed false statements that this game was PvP focused, not PvE focused early on, falsehoods that the original dev team made this a PvP focused game, and the petty comment that PvE carebears are the reason this will not happen (clearly coming from someone who cannot handle going against actual PvP players). are all a different story but it is they that worked to change the tone of this thread.
Except this game originally was geared towards PvPers. The original trailers were focused on the war in Cyrodiil, and the original cinematic trailers were based on an epic battle between 3 alliances. The PvE was also way more challenging with veteran zones and adventure zones aka Craglorn. Then the original developers were replaced and this game went full casual-PvE mode. This game has been a huge bait and switch. Honestly I think the only reason why I still keep up with the game is in hope that they'll return to their roots, but none of their recent behavior is indicating this.3 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
If it were so easy to implement Zos would have done so as it was their intent at the start. Of course it would not have been the design you suggest as it would not make sense to force much of the player base to not partake in a significant part of the system that was not an issue before hand.1 -
TheShadowScout✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Oh, I would agree on that. And I wish they would add a PvE "danger" to criminal activities to make up for the scrapped PvP part of the justice system... because I for one - like- playing smart to avoid bounties. But that is why I come up with ideas like: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/498004/for-great-justice-iiTheShadowScout wrote: »It has all been said.
They had plans, found numerous issues during conceptual stage, scrapped those plans and made a big fat "NOPE" on the whole idea.
Half the playerbase who were eager to gank those hapless questers who follow TG and DB stories sighed in disappointment... and the other half cheered in the knowledge they won't get ganked unless they actually go into cyrodil or other PvPlaces.
And until and unless the poweers that be change their mind on this... its hardly worth discussing.
If youre a good thief and assassin you shouldnt even have a bounty. All it did was take away all the danger from being a criminal. Which is sad tbh, completely gutted the depth of the game...
1 -
Strider__Roshin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
If it were so easy to implement Zos would have done so as it was their intent at the start. Of course it would not have been the design you suggest as it would not make sense to force much of the player base to not partake in a significant part of the system that was not an issue before hand.
The design I suggested was the one ZOS came up with. When the devs were swapped out they dropped the idea.2 -
DaveMoeDee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭I hate watching other players crap disrespectfully over other players' ideas in the forum. You can tell them their idea won't happen and why, but you don't have to be a d!$k about it.
A lot of players (myself included) wanted this, and we know it won't happen. Just let us dream without yelling at us.
As far as the original post this has been just a normal discussion. As far as those who have contributed false statements that this game was PvP focused, not PvE focused early on, falsehoods that the original dev team made this a PvP focused game, and the petty comment that PvE carebears are the reason this will not happen (clearly coming from someone who cannot handle going against actual PvP players). are all a different story but it is they that worked to change the tone of this thread.
Except this game originally was geared towards PvPers. The original trailers were focused on the war in Cyrodiil, and the original cinematic trailers were based on an epic battle between 3 alliances. The PvE was also way more challenging with veteran zones and adventure zones aka Craglorn. Then the original developers were replaced and this game went full casual-PvE mode. This game has been a huge bait and switch. Honestly I think the only reason why I still keep up with the game is in hope that they'll return to their roots, but none of their recent behavior is indicating this.
It was not "geared" towards PvPers from the start. PvP was one of the game modes from the start. One of many features they hoped players would enjoy. Look at the tons of narrative content from day one. It was geared toward PvE, if anything. PvP was an activity players could also enjoy.
I'm not sure why you think the original trailers are PvP focused. They are focused on the base game story. The war is part of that story. If you actually re-watch the trailers, you will see three protagonists fighting the same enemy. It looks nothing like a PvP focused game. Maybe you are caught up on the one trailer that had the siege equipment that was clearly meant to hype the PvP. Yes, they also marketed their PvP. They
The game is what it was at launch. Narrative rich.
This false narrative is getting old. Stop trying to promote PvP from one of the features to some unique focus of the game. Changes in developers didn't demote Cyrodiil. It was there to attract people who wanted PvP. It was never the focus of the game in marketing or in design. It is easy to make arguments like yours. I can make one claiming that since PvP is introduced at level 10 and Craglorn originally required you to be at a higher level, Craglorn was endgame and PvP wasn't. These kinds of arguments just get silly. It ends up being 2 people fishing for arguments to talk past the other.Edited by DaveMoeDee on January 4, 2020 4:44AM9 -
DaveMoeDee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
If it were so easy to implement Zos would have done so as it was their intent at the start. Of course it would not have been the design you suggest as it would not make sense to force much of the player base to not partake in a significant part of the system that was not an issue before hand.
The design I suggested was the one ZOS came up with. When the devs were swapped out they dropped the idea.
ZOS are still the devs. They never stopped being the devs.
Or is there a particular employee you are talking about when you make this sweeping claim?Edited by DaveMoeDee on January 4, 2020 4:47AM3 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
If it were so easy to implement Zos would have done so as it was their intent at the start. Of course it would not have been the design you suggest as it would not make sense to force much of the player base to not partake in a significant part of the system that was not an issue before hand.
The design I suggested was the one ZOS came up with. When the devs were swapped out they dropped the idea.
The lead dev is still running the show. His vision is what drives this game.
3 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭DaveMoeDee wrote: »It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
If it were so easy to implement Zos would have done so as it was their intent at the start. Of course it would not have been the design you suggest as it would not make sense to force much of the player base to not partake in a significant part of the system that was not an issue before hand.
The design I suggested was the one ZOS came up with. When the devs were swapped out they dropped the idea.
ZOS are still the devs. They never stopped being the devs.
Or is there a particular employee you are talking about when you make this sweeping claim?
You are correct. I have no idea what they are talking about since the game launched with a PvE focus and Matt Firor has been in charge of the development of this game since 2007. The various dev teams progress their area based on Matt's direction.3 -
Strider__Roshin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭DaveMoeDee wrote: »It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
If it were so easy to implement Zos would have done so as it was their intent at the start. Of course it would not have been the design you suggest as it would not make sense to force much of the player base to not partake in a significant part of the system that was not an issue before hand.
The design I suggested was the one ZOS came up with. When the devs were swapped out they dropped the idea.
ZOS are still the devs. They never stopped being the devs.
Or is there a particular employee you are talking about when you make this sweeping claim?
From their own mouth:
https://youtu.be/zAFdcsmJlKE 2 -
Strider__Roshin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭DaveMoeDee wrote: »I hate watching other players crap disrespectfully over other players' ideas in the forum. You can tell them their idea won't happen and why, but you don't have to be a d!$k about it.
A lot of players (myself included) wanted this, and we know it won't happen. Just let us dream without yelling at us.
As far as the original post this has been just a normal discussion. As far as those who have contributed false statements that this game was PvP focused, not PvE focused early on, falsehoods that the original dev team made this a PvP focused game, and the petty comment that PvE carebears are the reason this will not happen (clearly coming from someone who cannot handle going against actual PvP players). are all a different story but it is they that worked to change the tone of this thread.
Except this game originally was geared towards PvPers. The original trailers were focused on the war in Cyrodiil, and the original cinematic trailers were based on an epic battle between 3 alliances. The PvE was also way more challenging with veteran zones and adventure zones aka Craglorn. Then the original developers were replaced and this game went full casual-PvE mode. This game has been a huge bait and switch. Honestly I think the only reason why I still keep up with the game is in hope that they'll return to their roots, but none of their recent behavior is indicating this.
It was not "geared" towards PvPers from the start. PvP was one of the game modes from the start. One of many features they hoped players would enjoy. Look at the tons of narrative content from day one. It was geared toward PvE, if anything. PvP was an activity players could also enjoy.
I'm not sure why you think the original trailers are PvP focused. They are focused on the base game story. The war is part of that story. If you actually re-watch the trailers, you will see three protagonists fighting the same enemy. It looks nothing like a PvP focused game. Maybe you are caught up on the one trailer that had the siege equipment that was clearly meant to hype the PvP. Yes, they also marketed their PvP. They
The game is what it was at launch. Narrative rich.
This false narrative is getting old. Stop trying to promote PvP from one of the features to some unique focus of the game. Changes in developers didn't demote Cyrodiil. It was there to attract people who wanted PvP. It was never the focus of the game in marketing or in design. It is easy to make arguments like yours. I can make one claiming that since PvP is introduced at level 10 and Craglorn originally required you to be at a higher level, Craglorn was endgame and PvP wasn't. These kinds of arguments just get silly. It ends up being 2 people fishing for arguments to talk past the other.
Except it was
https://youtu.be/lLcQCkJFsG0 2 -
JKorr✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
You can't be hunted inside towns.... hm.... You do realize the *town* guards who walk patrols in *town* might have a different opinion, right? You can unintentionally get a bounty high enough to be kill on site, there is no paying a guard. And the routes used getting to the Thieves' refuge doors that are *outside* of town would be just wonderful camping spots for griefers, wouldn't they.
So again, there's no way to do pve content without having pvp players griefing/ganking pve players. And it is forcing pvp on players who don't want to pvp.0 -
Tandor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
This approach of claiming that it isn't forcing PvP on anyone if you have the option of not doing the PvE content and amassing a bounty or can only do so in a particular way is a tired one that's been rejected so many times. PvE crimes in PvE areas should not have PvP penalties, it'a really that simple.Every time people suggest that a PvP element would be optional, they wreck their own argument by making it perfectly clear that the optional bit involves restricting or otherwise changing the way the PvE content is run.
As for making guards killable, that opens up another whole method of exploitation as well as littering the cities with even more corpses than the few through the Dark Brotherhood quests that generate a lot of complaints from players already.5 -
Strider__Roshin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
You can't be hunted inside towns.... hm.... You do realize the *town* guards who walk patrols in *town* might have a different opinion, right?
-_- I'm obviously talking about players hunting you.0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭DaveMoeDee wrote: »It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
If it were so easy to implement Zos would have done so as it was their intent at the start. Of course it would not have been the design you suggest as it would not make sense to force much of the player base to not partake in a significant part of the system that was not an issue before hand.
The design I suggested was the one ZOS came up with. When the devs were swapped out they dropped the idea.
ZOS are still the devs. They never stopped being the devs.
Or is there a particular employee you are talking about when you make this sweeping claim?
From their own mouth:https://youtu.be/zAFdcsmJlKE
Matt Firor has lead the team since 2007 and that video was made in 2014. So to suggest the change of course was due to the dev team being swapped out is very misleading and your video does not even begin to suggest otherwise.6 -
Strider__Roshin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
This approach of claiming that it isn't forcing PvP on anyone if you have the option of not doing the PvE content and amassing a bounty or can only do so in a particular way is a tired one that's been rejected so many times. PvE crimes in PvE areas should not have PvP penalties, it'a really that simple.Every time people suggest that a PvP element would be optional, they wreck their own argument by making it perfectly clear that the optional bit involves restricting or otherwise changing the way the PvE content is run.
As for making guards killable, that opens up another whole method of exploitation as well as littering the cities with even more corpses than the few through the Dark Brotherhood quests that generate a lot of complaints from players already.
No argument wrecked here. Don't want to get hunted by players? Don't get caught and leave town with a bounty. If you get caught trying to steal and leave town with a bounty be prepared for a player to do that the guard couldn't. It's an extra incentive to not get caught. It'll be a good addition to the game if they add it.2 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭DaveMoeDee wrote: »I hate watching other players crap disrespectfully over other players' ideas in the forum. You can tell them their idea won't happen and why, but you don't have to be a d!$k about it.
A lot of players (myself included) wanted this, and we know it won't happen. Just let us dream without yelling at us.
As far as the original post this has been just a normal discussion. As far as those who have contributed false statements that this game was PvP focused, not PvE focused early on, falsehoods that the original dev team made this a PvP focused game, and the petty comment that PvE carebears are the reason this will not happen (clearly coming from someone who cannot handle going against actual PvP players). are all a different story but it is they that worked to change the tone of this thread.
Except this game originally was geared towards PvPers. The original trailers were focused on the war in Cyrodiil, and the original cinematic trailers were based on an epic battle between 3 alliances. The PvE was also way more challenging with veteran zones and adventure zones aka Craglorn. Then the original developers were replaced and this game went full casual-PvE mode. This game has been a huge bait and switch. Honestly I think the only reason why I still keep up with the game is in hope that they'll return to their roots, but none of their recent behavior is indicating this.
It was not "geared" towards PvPers from the start. PvP was one of the game modes from the start. One of many features they hoped players would enjoy. Look at the tons of narrative content from day one. It was geared toward PvE, if anything. PvP was an activity players could also enjoy.
I'm not sure why you think the original trailers are PvP focused. They are focused on the base game story. The war is part of that story. If you actually re-watch the trailers, you will see three protagonists fighting the same enemy. It looks nothing like a PvP focused game. Maybe you are caught up on the one trailer that had the siege equipment that was clearly meant to hype the PvP. Yes, they also marketed their PvP. They
The game is what it was at launch. Narrative rich.
This false narrative is getting old. Stop trying to promote PvP from one of the features to some unique focus of the game. Changes in developers didn't demote Cyrodiil. It was there to attract people who wanted PvP. It was never the focus of the game in marketing or in design. It is easy to make arguments like yours. I can make one claiming that since PvP is introduced at level 10 and Craglorn originally required you to be at a higher level, Craglorn was endgame and PvP wasn't. These kinds of arguments just get silly. It ends up being 2 people fishing for arguments to talk past the other.
Except it washttps://youtu.be/lLcQCkJFsG0
Again, nothing in that video suggest Zos is suggesting Cyrodiil is the main focus of the game at any point of the games development. Anyone with a clue that saw the game at launch and had watched that video would see the game had a PvE focus. That video proves nothing.5 -
TheFM✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭It would be an easy system to implement. Your character can't be hunted inside towns, and you'll only be flagged so long as you have a bounty on you and you're outside of town. Meaning, if you pay off your bounty via guard you'll have nothing to worry about. I would make guards killable though in order to make things interesting. This isn't forcing PvP on anyone. If you active this PvP system it's because you invited it.
This approach of claiming that it isn't forcing PvP on anyone if you have the option of not doing the PvE content and amassing a bounty or can only do so in a particular way is a tired one that's been rejected so many times. PvE crimes in PvE areas should not have PvP penalties, it'a really that simple.Every time people suggest that a PvP element would be optional, they wreck their own argument by making it perfectly clear that the optional bit involves restricting or otherwise changing the way the PvE content is run.
As for making guards killable, that opens up another whole method of exploitation as well as littering the cities with even more corpses than the few through the Dark Brotherhood quests that generate a lot of complaints from players already.
No argument wrecked here. Don't want to get hunted by players? Don't get caught and leave town with a bounty. If you get caught trying to steal and leave town with a bounty be prepared for a player to do that the guard couldn't. It's an extra incentive to not get caught. It'll be a good addition to the game if they add it.
Exactly. But options are bad? I guess.1